panditah134798

panditah134798

    New Feature

    Browse Your Followers or See Who You're Following

  • #2342of 20566

William's Bio

panditah134798

panditah134798 wrote a review of on October 19, 2013

4 5

Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer
Fit: True to size

I have found these to be incredibly comfortable for both running and general use. As others have noted, there is heel slip but they don't seem to cause blisters. The fit is very comfortable, like slippers, and the sole is sticky (which I really like)
My ONLY gripe is that the sole is totally flat, so I can't use a gaiter unless I cut a groove in the sole. I'd give 4.5 stars if I could.

(0)

 

0 Comments

panditah134798

panditah134798 wrote a review of on June 22, 2013

5 5

Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer

I got this on SAC. I know it seems a little weird, like a jackalope. But this rapidly became my favorite layer and the piece I always have with me. It's super soft, great neck, very light, and breathes well while still keeping me plenty warm (at least if I have a shell on). I had typically worn insulator-type sweaters under my shell, but tended to drown in sweat if I was doing any sidestepping or hiking. Now, I just open my pit zips and I'm good to go. If it's really warm, I wear this with a vest and I'm perfect.
I'm 5'7", 145 lbs with wide shoulders and, as is typical for Patty, the shoulders and waist are a smidge long in a M but I am not phased.
I don't try to rock this as a casual layer (I have the blue/green) but I guess you could if you were more confident than I!

(1)

 

panditah134798

panditah134798 wrote a review of on February 6, 2013

5 5

Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer

I have last years (green). It is VERY green. I like the thought that went into this jacket: great pockets, huge pit zips, capacious hood. For a hardshell, it has a "soft hand" and feels a little stretchy: much less crinkly than my older Arcteryx. My only 2 "gripes" (which aren't really gripes):
1) I like a small sleeve pocket, which this doesn't have
2) the fit is a bit baggier than I'm used to. I'm 5'7" 150 lbs and I swim a little in the M although of course that's great for layering warm stuff.
Good job!

(0)

 

panditah134798

panditah134798 wrote a review of on February 1, 2013

4 5

Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer

I really like this jacket: seems pretty darn weatherproof and has attention to garment details that you'd expect from Eider. Great hood (not removable, despite description), a "medium" hand (not hard like my old Arcteryx nor soft like a true softshell), smaller but well-placed and well-thought out pockets.
That said, for this price-point I think it should be PERFECT (and maybe also do my laundry). Some little picky things:
1) the brushed liner seems a bit weak and I'm already shredding it in the sleeves. I don't think that's functional
2) the sleeve pocket zipper catches the liner consistently and so I?m constantly prying it apart
3) the fit is pretty "euro" so I don't go for a puffy insulator under it. It's actually pretty warm for a shell.
Overall, I tend to reach for it for the resort. Perhaps a bit less bombproof than my Sidewinder SV but also not so "crinkly?". For a looser fit, or for touring, I like my Flylow Quantum. The small things don?t phase me much but I think they would if I paid full price!

(0)

 

0 Comments

panditah134798

panditah134798 wrote a review of on February 1, 2013

4 5

Familiarity: I've used it several times

Some restating of what others have said. I'm almost the definition of M (in my mind); 32 " waist, 30" inseam, big thighs and butt. I got the small, it fits very well. Yes the back pockets look weird, but 1) my wife likes them 2) I can move the wallet around so I'm not perched on it while driving. I find them to be very soft and yet strong, and they have taken over from my similar Cloudveil pants. Overall, pretty darn happy although I haven't yet had the crotch splitting that others have noted.

(0)

 

0 Comments

panditah134798

panditah134798 wrote a review of on December 31, 2012

5 5

Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer

I have these mounted standard with Bishop tele bindings. I ski the 176 length (I'm 5'7", 150 lbs). These have become my daily tele drivers. They've been remarkably fun on hardpack (well, what we call hardpack in UT) and also hold their own in both powder and chopped up powder. The camber seems quite minimal but I have't had any tip-dive. Very predictable, smooth, and poppy. The rear shape is really nice, and feels stiff while still allowing me to "falling leaf" out of problems. I use the Double Helix for alpine and got my wife the powder Envys and can't say enough good things about these skis.

(0)

 

panditah134798

panditah134798 wrote a review of on December 28, 2012

4 5

Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer

I have the green, which is really really green. I like the fabric, which is stretchy and seems completely weatherproof. The pockets are very functional. The high back is nice and I wear these even though I usually prefer bibs.
They are very insulated and I found them way too warm to tele in if wearing any kind of thermal underlayer.
The downsides:
1) the belt is pretty stretchy. I have a 31" waist and, in the M pant, have to use a 2nd belt to keep things snug
2) the cuff protector isn't much. I am very hard on pants and have quite a few holes already this season. I get the impression the nice people at Eider will be repairing my pants a lot...
Overall a nice pant with an eyecatching color

(0)

 

0 Comments

panditah134798

panditah134798 wrote a review of on December 28, 2012

5 5

Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer

I'm mainly an Alta skier, 5'7" 150 lbs. I had these set up for tele last year but didn't dig 'em and remounted them at standard mount for this year. They quickly became my favorite ski, even beating out my Icelantic Shamans (which were previously my favorite ski ever). I ski the 174 length, which can feel a mite short in deeper snow but are great in general.
What I like about them: very "poppy", they carve very well on groomers, I can make any shape turn, I can land in the backseat with great control, and they turn super quick in any conditions. Haven't skied them on ice but don't plan to either. Not bad at all in moguls.
Overall, they are very versatile and great for all conditions. My other alpine skis are Shamans (a great great ski but different) and Megawatts (the older white ones; a VERY fun skin in the soft but not so versatile for me)

(0)

 

0 Comments

0 Answers

panditah134798

panditah134798 wrote a review of on February 14, 2012

5 5

Truly awesome. I use my 173 (I'm 5'7", 140 lb) for alpine, 161 for tele. When skiing these, I feel "heroic"; I can blast GS turns at comical speeds, go into slalom turns, encounter most conditions without altering speed or style. Not the most versatile in terms of turn-shape. As most people note, it is best to drive them and stay on top, or else the short tail will not stay in control. I also find that they do not straightline well, as they always want to dive into the turn. But these seem like mild issues; I got these as powder skis but--for both alpine and tele--they have become my daily drivers.

(0)

 

0 Comments

panditah134798

panditah134798 wrote an answer about on February 14, 2012

I have these mounted with Axls, my other favorite tele ski is Hippie Stinx (on my 2nd pair now) with Bombers. I love the Shamans but find 1) you need to stay centered and drive them pretty hard 2) they are VERY turny and do not straightline well. If I'm not being lazy, I find they absolutely rip and rail in all conditions (but avoid ice and steep moguls). They have definitely become my all mountain ski and I have another pair for Alpine. No problem on hops, no problem with super-tight turns, no problem arcing groomers, obviously super fun in powder and chop. Keep the Hippies for rock skis and harder days.

(1)

 

panditah134798

panditah134798 wrote a question about on July 8, 2011

Ok, I'm so confused. I use 2.25" diameter drums and they are definitely a workout in higher gears. But they're definitely spin-able if I use lower gears. If I add the Resistance Fan for some cooling breeze and to make it a bit harder, am I just asking for death or is anyone using this combo successfully?

(1)

 

panditah134798

panditah134798 wrote a question about on February 20, 2011

AT vs Tele? I know it's a dumb "it depends" question but I have a pair of Megas and am trying to decide to mount Dukes vs tele (likely HHs). I have the 178 cm, I'm 5'7" and 140lb, I have been skiing a long time but am getting older/slower/less aggressive. I'm concerned that they may be too wide for a lightweight like me to turn with tele, especially on end-of-day chopped up and groomers (I mainly ski Alta or Solitude). Any opinions on this (besides "it depends") and/or do I follow the recommended mounting points? thanks!!

(0)

 

panditah134798

panditah134798 wrote a question about on April 4, 2010

I've had this pump a LONG time and have loved it. Recently (and all of a sudden), the pump will not work, in that no air comes out via the presta side and all comes out the schrader side. If I plug up the schrader side, pressure just builds up. I can't see a way to rebuild or even explore the pump head. Should I get a new pump?

(0)

 

0 Comments

panditah134798

panditah134798 wrote a question about on February 16, 2010

Ok, I tried my buddy's 161 cm w Bishops and LOVED 'em but am still a little hesitant on size (despite speaking with the guys at the Icelantic shop in denver). I'm 5'7'', 145 lb, expert; would 173 cm be the way to go or is everyone right about the 161 cm? Seems just too short....

(0)